Supreme Court punts on Trump immunity, taking thorny topic off debate table

[mystery-ak]

Supreme Court punts on Trump immunity, taking thorny topic off debate table
headshot

    Avery Lotz

The Supreme Court took what could have been a heated topic at Thursday's presidential debate off the table by pushing its decision on former President Trump's legal immunity case for at least 24 hours.

Why it matters: Trump's legal woes are at the center of both candidates' campaigns. For President Biden, it's because he knows some voters might shy away from backing a convicted felon. For Trump, it's because he claims to be the victim of politically motivated prosecutions.

Driving the news: The court is down to its final cases of the term, with the question of presidential immunity looming largest on the outstanding docket.

    Trump's two federal cases — one on his alleged efforts to undermine the results of the 2020 election and the other on his handling of classified documents after his time in the White House — hinge on the court's decision.

    During more than two hours of oral arguments in April, a majority of the justices appeared poised to grant the presumptive GOP nominee at least a partial victory, but they did not seem to be aligned with the "absolute immunity" argument Trump has pushed.

    Several justices seemed to agree that presidents can't be prosecuted for "official acts" — a core topic of the oral arguments that explored whether Trump's efforts to overturn the election were official or unofficial.

    The court will most likely kick the case back to lower courts, Axios' Sam Baker reports.

more
https://www.axios.com/2024/06/27/trump-immunity-decision-debate-scotus

[Right_in_Virginia]

More decisions on Mon, Jul 1.

[Right_in_Virginia]

I'm liking this one ...

Julie Kelly
@julie_kelly2

In a massive victory for J6 political prisoners and an unprecedented defeat for the corrupt Biden/Garland/Monaco/Graves DOJ, SCOTUS has overturned the DOJ's use of 1512(c)(2), obstruction of an official proceeding, in J6 cases.

THIS MEANS THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE HAS UNLAWFULLY PROSECUTED 350+ AMERICANS FOR THEIR PARTICIPATION IN JANUARY 6--A FLAGRANT ABUSE OF THE LAW TO PUNISH THOSE WHO PROTESTED BIDEN'S ELECTION AND TO CRIMINALIZE POLITICAL DISSENT.


10:46 AM · Jun 28, 2024

[Bigun]

Fischer v. United States, the court holds that to prove a violation of the law, the government must show that the defendant impaired the availability or integrity for use in an official proceeding of records, documents, objects, or other things used in an official proceeding, or attempted to do so. The case is returned to the lower court to determine whether the indictment can still stand in light of this new and narrower interpretation.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Interesting on the J6 decision that Justice Jackson joined the majority opinion, and Justice Barrett dissented (she wrote the dissent) with Sotomayor and Kagan

[Right_in_Virginia]

Jonathan Turley
@JonathanTurley

D.C. Circuit is reversed in the J6 case...

...Obviously, there were other charges like trespass that will not be impacted.  However, this hits hundreds of cases. Those cases must now be reviewed on just on the underlying convictions but sentencing in many cases.  It will not impact those cases which only went forward on trespass which are also numbers in the hundreds...

...For Trump, this rips the wings of the plane that Jack Smith has been trying to take off in D.C. In an ordinary case, there would be a superseding indictment. Smith may try to go forward on the remaining counts. However, it is hard to see how the indictment holds together after this decision...


10:59 AM · Jun 28, 2024

[Wingnut]

I wonder if there will be another "Leak"?

[Smokin Joe]

Fischer v. United States, the court holds that to prove a violation of the law, the government must show that the defendant impaired the availability or integrity for use in an official proceeding of records, documents, objects, or other things used in an official proceeding, or attempted to do so. The case is returned to the lower court to determine whether the indictment can still stand in light of this new and narrower interpretation.

What was happening outside the building on J6 would not necessarily impede any proceedings inside. Which is why (imho) the windows were broken (likely by agents operating within the crowd) and the doors were opened. The protesters simply were not getting in fast enough and the hour was nigh when the objection to the electoral ballot count could be posed.

[Bigun]

6-3

Held: Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature
of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity
from criminal prosecution...